- 1. Hamlaw (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Mon, 06 Jan 97 10:35:09 CST
- I subscribed to the hamlaw list in November, and got the proper "bounce back" from the "mailbot" but have yet to receive any hamlaw messages. Do I have an email problem or have there been no messages
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-01/msg00093.html (8,795 bytes)
- 2. [DX] Spirit of the hobby (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Tue, 07 Jan 97 12:01:08 CST
- BRAVO - well said. Remember the old Troster coloumn in QST about the guy calling "CQ CQ No Lids, No Kids, First Class Operators Only"? I don't think we want the reflectors to reflect (hi) this attitu
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-01/msg00150.html (12,115 bytes)
- 3. Upcoming Public Hearing (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 97 11:14:40 CST
- Good luck today. I recently met with the Board of my Homeowner's Association, and in a similar vein, went over the various possible antenna installations. My "biggest" was an 89' retractable mast wit
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-01/msg00544.html (13,458 bytes)
- 4. MA40 Plan Part III (Long) (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Mon, 11 Nov 96 09:21:29 CST
- Joe you have sympathetic fellow travelers on your journey. First a real fact: the "strongest" tubular I know of is the 70' "Sky Needle". Second a suggestion: Seek out your ARRL volunteer counsel in t
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-11/msg00077.html (9,026 bytes)
- 5. *** DENIED *** (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 96 10:21:26 CST
- Application to Architectural Control Commitee: ** DENIED ** Thanks again to all who helped me with pictures. I proposed a very "neighbor friendly" installation with a retractable tubular mast and sma
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-11/msg00186.html (7,839 bytes)
- 6. *** DENIED *** (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 96 10:36:44 CST
- Application to Architectural Control Commitee: ** DENIED ** Thanks again to all who helped me with pictures. I proposed a very "neighbor friendly" installation with a retractable tubular mast and sma
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-11/msg00187.html (7,869 bytes)
- 7. Re[2]: *** DENIED *** (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Mon, 25 Nov 96 08:07:15 CST
- Sorry to hear that your result was not good. --SNIP-- I suppose you can do it legally in time but the best way out is to move to a location that DOES NOT HAVE CC&Rs THAT YOU WILL HAVE TO SIGN PRIOR T
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-11/msg00205.html (8,746 bytes)
- 8. Re *** DENIED *** (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Mon, 25 Nov 96 08:30:08 CST
- John the new FCC ruling allowing small (DSS) overrides CC&R's. On the other hand the FCC in Feb 92??? in regards to "C" band dishes says that you CANNOT discrimanate on tyoes of antennas. The ARRL co
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-11/msg00206.html (9,272 bytes)
- 9. Re[2]: *** DENIED *** (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Mon, 25 Nov 96 08:39:31 CST
- ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Sorry about your antenna problems John but quite frankly I think in the case of deed restrictions you need a realestat
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-11/msg00207.html (7,653 bytes)
- 10. Some Questions re 55G rotating tower (score: 1)
- Author: John_Langdon@medianet.com (John_Langdon@medianet.com)
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 96 09:45:01 CST
- I am in planning stages of a similiar installation. I am a EE by training, so tend to be overly conservative on structural issues. I am an expert in the true sense - I know what I don't know. With re
- /archives//html/Towertalk/1996-10/msg00324.html (7,880 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu